 Okay. Now, let's talk more about Johnson. So forget Jeremy Corbyn, forget the left. Let's talk about what Johnson's, how he won, and what I expect moving forward. Now, I've often said that Brexit is either good or bad depending on what they do with it. Brexit is just, in a sense, the United Kingdom gaining some more ability to dictate their own future, independent of what happens in the rest of Europe, and they could determine a pretty bad future. They could determine a good future. So Brexit will be judged by, based on what they do with it. And what one believes they will do with it depends on why you think Brexit was so popular in this election. Indeed, it seems that Brexit is even more popular than it was when the referendum was actually passed, because if you think about it, not only did labor who were ambiguous about Brexit lose big time, including in their stronghold in the industrial north, but the liberal Democrats, who were the only political party that were explicitly anti-Brexit, explicitly anti-Brexit, who should have gone at all their main votes, and therefore should have grown, and I would have expected the liberal Democrats to grow at the expense of labor, maybe even at the expense of the conservatives to some extent. The liberal Democrats were crushed. I mean, they weren't crushed, but in comparison to expectations, they were crushed. They lost seats, and indeed, the leader of the liberal Democrats lost her seat. Now, it's interesting to observe why. Well, one is because I think support for a remain has actually dwindled over time in the UK, and at the end of the day, focused on the labor party, even though the labor party was not an ambiguously pro-remain. It was quite the contrary. They were strongly flirting with Lee because their voters wanted one to leave. Second, the liberal Democrats adopted the cultural nuttiness of the left. So one of the things that killed the leader of the liberal Democrats, and I forget her name now, was a video released showing her talking about kind of this, what it means to be a woman. Is there such a thing as a woman, you know, transgender stuff, which I guess alienated a lot of kind of what I call ordinary common common, the common people who might have been remained, but I'm not going to adopt this culturally. I don't know. I don't know what the term is. This culturally leftist agenda. So the two things that I think alienated people from the labor movement and from the liberal Democrats in the end. One is kind of the overreaching when it comes to socialism. Overreaching when it comes to the role of the state of economics. Not that they oppose the role of the state of economics, but the labor just went overboard on that. Second, the idea, actually there are more than two. The idea of remain, the idea of remaining, I think a lot of the laborist traditional supporters were against remaining and for leaving. And remain is associated with elites, with globalization, with free trade, with free movement of capital, and maybe most importantly with free immigration or free year immigration movement of labor. And third, I think the kind of the wackiness of 99 different genders and the whole left's obsession about white guilt and obsession about, you know, racial politics and gender politics and all of that stuff, which I think most people just don't get, don't care about, think is nutty and think is crazy. And I think those are the three things that turned voters against both the liberal Democrats and Boris Johnson. Now, what about, what did Boris Johnson do in order to both capture those voters and realign the conservative movement? Because I think he has realigned. This is not, unfortunately, in spite of what I said last time where I was trying to be a little optimistic. This is far from the Margaret Thatcher conservative movement of 30, 40 years ago. What Johnson has realigned the movement around is a left-leaning economic policy, an economic policy of government intervention, government control. I mean, one of the things that he kept emphasizing in the campaign is that he was going to dramatically increase spending on the national health service. That he was no longer going to abide by so-called austerity measures. There's never been, there hasn't been austerity in the UK. It's ridiculous. But on any kind of controls and government spending, he's going to spend, he emphasizes, he's going to spend on infrastructure. He's going to spend on health care. He's going to spend on welfare, on expanding the state and expanding the power of the state and the state's involvement, particularly on the side of welfare and helping the poor. Indeed, you can expect tax cuts from the Johnson government, but there'll be all tax cuts aimed at the working class, the poor parts of society. So, Johnson has moved the conservative party significantly to the left on economic policy, at least in his agenda he presented that won him the election. And I think since he's going to want to win again, I think he's going to want to rule in order to win. I think the conclusion is, and if you look at Donald Trump, I think the conclusion is, if you are on the right, that the way to win elections from the right is to figure out the ways in which your voters feel left out of the economy, feel hurt by the economy, feel alienated by the current economy, and address those, and address those. And that means things like being, you know, anti-trade, and I said before, I really hope that the UK becomes this free trade island like it was in the 19th century, but I fear that's not going to happen because I fear there's a huge, huge, huge motivation to be anti-trade if you want to win elections. To be pro welfare state, to be pro-socialized medicine, to be pro-government spending, not to be pro austerity, to be for an infrastructure project, infrastructure spending. You see this with Donald Trump, you see it with a massive government spending that is going on right now. The huge deficits that the United States is engaged in. And I think you're going to see the same thing with Jeremy Corbyn. I think he's going to move economically to the left, not to the left of Jeremy Corbyn, not to the left of Bernie Sanders, but to the left of Thatcher, to the left of even the last few conservative governments that have been pretty weak and pretty pathetic, just like Trump has moved to the left of George Bush, who already had moved the Republican Party far to the left on economic policies. So one, you're going to see a conservative party that is going to move to the left on economics. And a conservative party that's going to move to the right. And here I use right and left in kind of the conventional way, not to mean individualism, collectivism, you know, individualism and the right collectivist. No, both the collectivist, but right to mean more nationalist, more fascist, more xenophobic. He's going to move to the right on many of the social issues. So you can expect Johnson to be far more efficient than Donald Trump on restricting immigration, significantly restricting immigration. Again, Johnson has, Boris has a much stronger, much, you know, much more, much more capacity to bring about new legislation than Donald Trump has. So Trump has proposed new immigration legislation, but it goes nowhere because he needs some democratic support and he needs a significant democratic support in the House of Representatives. So I think he's going to move to the right on immigration. Greg Salamiri asked in economics, will Johnson be to the right, left or right of Cameron? I think he's going to be to the left of Cameron. I think they're going to be people in his government who are to the right of Cameron. There are actually quite a few free marketers who are part of the government, but I think Johnson's political instincts are going to drive him to the left. I think he's going to be strongly left on the environmentalism. He's going to be, he's going to put together some kind of green new deal, not the nutty green new deal that we have in the US. So a more reasonable green new deal, but reasonable and green new deal. Don't go together in the same sentence. I think he's going to be, I think he's going to again cut taxes on middle class and working class. I think he is going to increase welfare spending and increase spending on the NHS. So he's going to be anti cutting government spending and increase government spending more than Camonded. Then again, I think that people in the government that there will be against that and be interesting to see dynamic within the conservative party on how this all works out. But given that he won, given that he's got this mandate, I think things will be dictated by Jeremy Corbyn. I think Jeremy Corbyn has a very good political instincts and he knows what wins. Again, what wins, we now have a formula I think. You can take Donald Trump and you can take Johnson and you can now establish a formula for the right to win. And if you're interested in this, I think articulated really, really well, Andrew Sullivan, who's by the way sympathetic to this formula. Andrew Sullivan who writes for New York magazine, who's kind of a Catholic conservative, sometimes libertarian, probably not anymore, not free market anymore, but doesn't know where he quite belongs. Anti Trump, really, really good writer. I'm actually doing an event with Andrew Sullivan in March at Clemson University. So it'll be me and Andrew Sullivan discussing Western civilization on stage should be really interesting. I'm looking forward to that. But Andrew Sullivan who writes, this is the new formula for the right to win. One, left on politics. Two, right on immigration, be more restrictive on immigration. And again, I think Andrew's right in a sense that Trump has not been effective on immigration, has not been able to restrict immigration because he doesn't have the legislative power to do so. I expect Boris Johnson to be much more effective in restricting immigration in the UK. Three, to be much more nationalistic in rhetoric, in verbiage. And there is a positive element here. I hate to say that, but there's a positive element and a negative element. And the negative I think way over powers the positive. The positive element is for a long time, certainly since 9 11, I have been complaining and many of us have been complaining that the biggest problem in the West is its lack of understanding what Western civilization is. It's lack of willingness to defend Western civilization. It's lack, if you will, of a self esteem and a backbone in standing up for what Western civilization really is. And in defending certain principles that are Western principles. So I think there's an element of Boris Johnson and the conservatives in the UK that is that has a little bit of that. But here's the problem. And this is the problem with the right in Europe. Generally, the right that is more sort of more strong, we have a culture, we have a good culture, we will not succumb our culture, we will not give in to Islam or to anybody in giving up our culture, Western culture is great. Is that they don't know what it is. They don't understand what civilization Western civilization is. So they mowed it off, but they can't actually defend what the culture is. And you know, I saw that in my debates with, not debates, discussions slash debates, with, you know, this is where my mind goes blank. What's his name? The British scholar who wrote about immigration, Douglas Murray. So in my discussions with Douglas Murray, you could tell that while he was struggling constantly to articulate what Western civilization was, he got some of it right. Great art is Western civilization, but he couldn't detach it from Christianity. He couldn't articulate it in a clear way. I mean, I've often said over and over again that Western civilization is basically two ideas that reflect, are reflected in the arts, are reflected in all the different achievements, in the science, and in the achievements of Western civilization, but the two ideas are reason and individualism, the efficacy of reason and what that means in terms of individualism and therefore political freedom and capitalism. That is what Western civilization is as manifest in, you know, the kind of individualistic art, the kind of expressive art, the kind of romantic art, but even in the Renaissance, the kind of individualistic, expressive, science-based, observation-based, you could say reason-based art that comes out of the Renaissance, and a respect for the individual, and heroism that again comes out of the Renaissance, which is all about this reason and individualism, it's what they get from Greece, and that's what Western civilization is. It's those ideas that they adopt from Greece. They don't know that. They have no concept of what it is. So when they talk about Western civilization, it comes out this babbling, incoherent nonsense, and much of it can easily be viewed as xenophobic, even racist, you know, and incoherent mostly. And of course, into that space of incoherence, what you get are the worst elements of the right jumping in to explain, to articulate exactly what Western civilization is, and they are, they are, without exception, they are racists. And soon I'm going to be doing a show on the New Alt-Right. Just thanks to Bradley Thompson, Professor Bradley Thompson, I discovered a whole new, whole new wing, if you will, of the right of the Alt-Right that is quite fascinating, and we'll be talking about that, and talking about the response of conventional conservatives to them, and how this plays into the civil war within the conservative movement between traditional conservatives and the national conservatives. But in my view, the national conservatives are winning, and that's exactly what Boris Johnson, even though he is not a national conservative, he is not, to the extent that he has any beliefs, I think he's a complete pragmatist, I don't think he's a national conservative. But I think that is the winning formula. The winning formula today on the right is national conservatism, industrial policy, trade policy, immigration policy, more government intervention in the economy, and more rah, rah, rah, about the flag, and about the greatness of the nation. All at the same time, spending like crazy. Because what national conservatives have done is they've adopted the talking point of the left that says capitalism doesn't work for the middle class, capitalism, economic freedom doesn't work for the poor, and inequality is outrageous and ridiculous, and we need to help the middle class, and we need to help them buy this industrial policy, trade policy, immigration policy, it's all meant to help you. Again, implicit in there, because they can't define what they're doing, and because they can't define the defense of Western civilization, implicit is there is a huge opening for the much worse elements within the right to flood in. And we'll be talking a lot about this over the days, weeks, months, years, because I view myself, I'm viewing myself more and more as one of the few voices out there that is urging us to be cautious of where this country is heading and who we're handing this country over to in terms of who's going to step in ultimately to fill in all these voids that are being created. What we need today, what I call the new intellectual would be any man or woman who is willing to think, meaning any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, not by feelings, wishes, wins or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of despair, cynicism, and impotence, and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist.